MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245574635 · doi:10.1108/oxan-db259667

Australian dispute exposes big tech's power and fears

2021· other· en· W4245574635 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerald expert briefings · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFreedom of Expression and Defamation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationRevenueJournalismSettlement (finance)AdvertisingPolitical sciencePower (physics)ModerationBusinessLawPaymentFinancePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significance Facebook on February 17 cut off its users from Australian news, in protest against the proposed legislation. News publishers want ‘big tech’ that earn advertising revenue from their news to pay for the journalism. They currently earn digital revenue from the click-through traffic that Facebook and Google dribble in their direction. Impacts Facebook's ability to block news in Australia entirely and at scale contrasts sharply with its other dilatory content moderation efforts. Without a settlement, Facebook risks Australia widening the draft law to include other Facebook ad-supported properties, eg, Instagram. Publishers are unlikely to devote all the money received from big tech to expanding newsroom budgets. Canada intends to adopt Australia's approach as it drafts its own legislation in coming months.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it